|
For a long time Islamic philosophy was under a cloud of doubt and
uncertainty. Some people denied its existence while others affirmed it.
This uncertainty continued all through the nineteenth century. Those who
denied the very existence of an Islamic philosophy feigned ignorance and
maintained that the teachings of Islam opposed all free discussion and
investigation, and therefore Islam has never risen to the aid of philosophy
and science throughout the centuries of its existence.
The only fruits Islam has borne for its followers have been
intellectual despotism and dogmatism, they said. Christianity, in
comparison, has been the cradle of free thought and discussion, they
maintained, patronizing art and literature, encouraging the sciences, and
becoming a fertile ground for the germination of new philosophy and helping
it to develop and bear fruit.1
Those who attacked and denigrated Islamic philosophy did not stop at
the kind of arguments that have been mentioned. They went much further an
extended their fallacious notions to general racial characteristics, and
extended what they said about philosophy and learning to political matters.
It is surprising that although the French politically opposed racial
discrimination, they were among the people who sowed the seeds of this kind
of attitude, the effects of which have continued well into the present century.
For example, Renan was the first person who openly stated the view that
the Semitic race is inferior to the Aryan race.2 This judgement of Renan's had an effect on some
of his contemporaries, and some of his disciples and students repeated his
views and published them far and wide. This was because Renan was both an
unequalled master of the Semitic languages and was more familiar with
Islamic matters than other researchers of his day.
Advancing the notions of the 'Semitic spirit' in contrast to the 'Aryan
spirit' by Leon Gauthier during the early part of the twentieth century was
nothing other than the continuation of the argument made by Renan. In
Gauthier's view, the Semitic mind is only capable of comprehending details
and particulars which are disconnected with each other or are combined and
incapable of conceiving any coherent order or relationship between details.
In other words, the 'Semitic spirit' is that of division and
separation, or in Gauthier's words, ésprit separatiste. The 'Aryan
spirit' on th other hand, is the spirit of integration and synthesis, ésprit
fusionniste, as he calls it.3
It follows naturally that since the Arabs are inherently able to
understand only particulars and isolated facts, they would be unable to form
any theories, propositions, laws or hypotheses. It would be futile
therefore to look for any philosophical or scientific investigations on
their part. This is especially true now when Islam has narrowed their
intellectual horizons and closed the doors to any speculative discussions,
so much so that the Muslim student denigrates and ridicules science and
philosophy.4
Those who stated such views, held that Islamic philosophy is simply an
imitation of Aristotelian philosophy, and Islamic philosophical texts are
nothing other than repititions of Greek ideas in Arabic.5
The views of Renan, which I have just mentioned, were widespread during
the nineteenth century. Fortunately the days when the habits, customs,
ethical, moral, and intellectual characteristics of a nation were thought
to be products of either its geographical conditions or racially inherited
traits have passed. Other attempts in the same vein or formulating
so-called 'national psychology' or 'group psychology' proved equally
futile.
Moreover, who has claimed that Islamic philosophy is a creation of Arab
thinking? It is a well established fact that many nationalities such as the
Persians, Indians, Turks, Egyptians, Syrians, Barbars, and Andalusians
contributed to the development and enrichment of Islamic philosophy.
Islamic civilsation at its zenith not only did not block the path of
science, it both confirmed and encouraged it. And far from opposing
philosophy, it welcomed and embraced it with open arms. It welcomed
opinions and views of every shade and colour.
How can Islam, which invites mankind to observe the heavens and the
earth and to contemplate and meditate upon their mysteries, oppose
discussion and inquiry and restrict the freedom of thought? Even Renan, who
expressed the kind of views about Islamic philosophy and science that we
have already mentioned, has confessed elsewhere that Muslims treated
conquered peoples with an indulgence unheard of throughout history.
For example, some among the Jews and Christians accepted Islam while
others preserved their ancestral faith and attained to high and honoured
official positions in the courts of the Muslim caliphs and rulers.
Moreover, although Muslims differed with the Jews and the Christians in
regard to beliefs and religious principles, they still married in those
communities.6
Of course, this is not the first time that this French historian and
philologist has contradicted himself. In one place he denies the very
existence of such a thing as an Arab (Islamic) philosophy and says: “The
only thing that the Arabs (Muslims) accomplished was to learn a Greek
encyclopedia of the seventh and eighth centuries.”7
Then he goes on to contradict his denial and asserts that there is a
uniquely Islamic philosophy whose special characteristics must be given
attention. He confesses that, “the Arabs (Muslims), like the Latins,
through engaging in interpretation of Aristotle's works learned how to
formulate a philosophy full of peculiar chraracteristics and elements in
serious opposition to what was taught at the Lyceum.”8
He then adds that “The original movement in Islamic philosophy should
be sought in the various schools of the Mutakallimun (theologians).”9
These contradictory statements of Renan's and the negligence evident in
his works did not remain hidden from Dugat, one of his contemporaries.
Dugat believed that the quality of thought such as witnessed in Ibn Sina
could not result in anything other than original and sophisticated
interpretations and views: and the schools of thought such as that of the
Mu'tazilites and the Ash'arites are nothing other than original creations
of Islamic thought.10
In the twentieth century what was expressed in the form of guess and
speculation by menlike Dugat wad found to be irrefutable and proven fact.
Researchers became gradually more familiar with Islamic topics than before,
and their understanding of the original and unique characteristics of
Islamic thought gradually increased. As they came to know more about Islam,
their judgement of it became fairer and more even-handed.
The truth of the matter is that the malicious intent of the nineteenth
century European scholars was quite evident in their handling of various
Islamic topics; because, while on the one hand they admitted that “the
works of the Islamic philosophers have not been adeqautely studied and our
knowledge of their substance and content of their writings is incomplete,”11 in the next breath they made the most general and
blanket statements and judgements on it and said that Islamic philosophy is
nothing other than an imitation of Aristotle.
It is well to keep in mind that these scholars had no direct access to
Islamic philosophy because they did not have the original texts at their
disposal, while the Latin translations could not give a full and accurate
portrayal of the scope and depth of this philosophy. Today, however, we can
speak with complete certainty of the accomplishments which the Islamic
civilization had made in this regard and still claim that there are a large
number of topics in Islamic thought which have not yet been fully investigated
and discussed.
As to the question of whether we should call this philosophy “Islamic”
or “Arab”, such questions are nothing but futile arguments over words and
names. This philosophy developed and grew in an Islamic environment and was
written in the Arabic language. The fact however that these thoughts were
written in Arabic does not mean that Islamic philosophy is a creation of
the Arab element.
We who have already condemned racism have never claimed any such
things. Islam gathered in its fold numerous nationalities and all of them
contributed to the growth and development of its thought. And as for this
philosophy being called “Islamic”, it can not be claimed that it is the
product of the intellectual efforts of the Muslims alone, since such a claim
would not sit well with the historical evidence available. Historical
records show that the earliest teachers of the Muslims were Nestorian,
Jacobites, Jews, and Sabaeans, and that Muslim scholars cooperated with
their Nestorian and Jewish contemporaries in their philosophical and
scientific investigations.
In any case, I am inclined to call this philosophy “Islamic” because of
two reasons. Firstly, Islam is not just a religion it is also a
civilization; and the topics of Islamic philosophy, despite the variety of
its sources and backgrounds of writers, are rooted in the Islamic
civilization. Secondly, the problems, the foundations, and aims of this
philosophy are all Islamic, and it was Islam that formed this cohesive
philosophy by gathering teachings and views belonging to many different
cultures and schools of thought.
Islamic philosophy is unique in the sort of topics and issues with
which it deals, the sort of problems it attempts to solve and the methods
it uses in order to solve them
Islamic philosophy concerned itself with such matters as the problem of
unity and multiplicity, the relationship between God and the world, both of
which had been subjects of heated controversies and discussions among the
theologians for a long time.12
Another aim of this philosophy was to reconcile revelation with reason,
knowledge with faith, and religion with philosophy, and to show that reason
and revelation do not contradict each other, and that religion would be
accepted by the pagan when it is illuminated by the light of philosophic
wisdom. It aimed to prove also that when religion embraces philosophy it
takes on philosophical qualities just as philosophy too assumes the colour
of religion. In all, Islamic philosophy is a creature of the environment in
which it grew and flourished, and as is quite obvious, it is a religious
and spiritual philosophy.
Although Islamic philosophy is religiously oriented, it has not ignored
any major philosophical issues. For example, it has extensively discussed
the problem of being, and defended its position on issues like time, space,
matter, and life. Its treatment of epistemology is both unique and
comprehensive.
It drew distinction between the self (nafs) and reason, inborn and
acquired qualities, accuracy and error, surmise and certain knowledge. It
has investigated the question of what is virtue and happiness and divided
virtues into a number of categories and reached the conclusion that the
highest virtue is uninterrupted contemplation and serene realization of the
Truth.
Muslim thinkers divided philosophy into the two generally accepted
categories of 'speculative' and 'practical' and their discussions extended
over varied topics such as natural philosophy, mathematics, metaphysics,
ethics and politics.13
Evidently, the Islamic thinkers believed philosophy to have a much
greater scope than is generally given it today, and in this regard their
work was similar to that of the Greek philosophers, specially Aristotle,
whom they imitated and followed. Thus, Islamic philosophy was intermingled
with medicine, biology, chemistry, botany, astronomy and music. Generally
speaking, all the fields of science were considered to be nothing other
than branches of philosophy.
Considering all that has been said, it would not be an overstatement to
claim that Islamic philosophy encompasses all the various aspects of
Islamic culture. It should, of course, be kept in mind that during the ages
when Islamic philosophy was developing and maturing, learning and
investigation were carried out in an encyclopedic and all-round manner.
Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that the full range of Islamic
philosophical thought cannot be fully accessible through the study of
philosophical texts alone. In order that a full understanding be attained,
it is necessary to expand the range of investigation and research to
include discussion of theology (kalam) and mysticism (tasawwuf).
It might even be necessary to relate any discussion of Islamic
philosophy to the history of Islamic Law and the principles of
jurisprudence. It is not rare to discover philosophical ideas, concepts,
and views in what are ostensibly Islamic scientific texts dealing with such
topics as medicine, geometery, chemistry, and astronomy.
Furthermore, some Muslim scientists showed more courage and freedom in
expressing philosophical views than that shown by those specializing in the
field of philosophy. Also, amongst Islamic mystical and theological
discussions, views and positions are encountered which in their profundity
and precision equal any found amongst the Aristotelians.
These Muslim thinkers challenged Aristotle's philosophy and struggled
against it for many years. This struggle led to the emergence of a
distinctive Islamic philosophy and thought. Later on a certain methodology
and forms of rational analysis were introduced into discussions about the
foundations of Islamic law and the principles of jurisprudence which have a
distinctly perceptible philosophical tinge. It is even possible to uncover
in their involved procedures, rules and methods similar to those in use
today.
What we have already said may give an idea of the wide scope of
philosophical thought in Islam. And it would be a mistake to limit
ourselves-as the nineteenth century European scholars did-to the study of a
few scattered Latin and Hebrew translations. In fact, if the depth and the
scope of Muslim philosophers' thinking is ever to be clearly and fully
understood, it must be done through an examination of the original sources
themselves.
However, even though not all the original texts have as yet been
published and subjected to research, enough is known to convince us that
the material gathered by the Muslim thinkers of the Middle Ages was greater
than that gathered by the Christian scholars of that era, that the Muslim
thinkers explored wider horizons, enjoyed more complete freedom, and made
greater inventions and discoveries than their Christian counterparts.
If, therefore, one is to speak of a Christian philosophy, or as it is
better known, of Christian Scholasticism, it would be more apt to speak
first of an Islamic philosophy and an Islamic Scholasticism, especially
since Christian Scholastic thought owes much to Islamic Scholasticism for
developing and clarifying many of its problems and issues.14
Islamic philosophy is to the East what Latin philosophy is to the West.
The combination of these two philosophical traditions plus the scientific
investigations carried out by Jewish scholars complete the history of
speculative thought of the Middle Ages.
In order that the true place of Islamic philosophy can clearly be
understood, and a full understanding of the various stages in the
development of human thought be attained, it is essential that we
investigate the relationship of the Islamic philosophy with ancient,
medieval, and modern philosophies.
We do not deny the fact that philosophical thought in Islam has been
influenced by Greek philosophy and that Islamic philosophers have mostly
adopted Aristotle's views. Nor do we deny that Islamic thinkers looked upon
Plotinus with wonder and followed him in many instances.
If a word is not repeated it dies, and who has not been an apprentice
at the school of his predecessors? We, the children of the twentieth
century, are still relying on the scientific work done by the Greeks and
Romans in a number of fields.
If, however, we should go so far as to label the use and join the
chorus sung by the likes of Renan who claims that Islamic philosophy is
nothing other than a replica of Aristotelian philosophy, or of some others
who say that it is an exact copy of Neo-Platonic philosophy, we would be
completely mistaken.15 The truth of the matter is that Islamic
philosophy has been influenced by a number of factors, the result of which
was birth of new ideas and views. Just as it has been influenced by Greek
thought, it has also been influenced by the Indian and Persian cultural
traditions.
The exchange and adoption of ideas do not always imply blind obedience.
Several individuals may examine a particular topic and the result of their
investigations may appear in a number of forms. A philosopher may utilize
some of the ideas of another philosopher but this does not prevent him from
giving birth to new ideas or to wholly new philosophical systems.
Spinoza, for example, even though clearly followed Descartes, was the
originator of an independent philosophical system of his own, and Ibn Sina,
even though a loyal disciple of Aristotle, put forth views never professed
by his master. Each of the Islamic philosophers lived in a particular
environment distinct from the environment of the other, and it would be a
mistake if we ignore the influence that these particular circumstances have
had on their philosophical ideas and views.
Thus the Muslim world could have a philosophy appropriate to its social
conditions and religious principles. As to what the nature of this
philosophy is, only an extensive discussion and analysis of its main ideas
and principles could provide us with the answer.
It is not possible for us to adequately discuss the relationship of
Islamic philosophy with modern philosophy in this article and speak of the
chain of ideas that relate these two together. This is specially true since
repeated attempts have been made during the middle of the present century
to discover the principles of modern philosophy and their roots in
Christian Scholasticism.
Today, when we are aware, of the relationship between modern and
medieval philosophy, on the one hand, and the influence of Islamic
philosophy on European medieval thought on the other, how is it possible to
ignore the influence that Islamic thought has had on modern philosophy? In
this study we shall discuss some examples of this influence and relation.
As we shall prove, the similarity between Islamic philosophy and modern
philosophy is so strong that one may speak of the existence of a kind of
kinship between them.
Without going into details we can say that the history of modern
philosophy originates with the consideration of two important issues:
firstly, the significance of the experimental aspect, which deals with
matters related to external reality; secondly speculation, which is
concerned with the rational sciences.
In other words, the experience of Bacon on the one hand and the doubt
of Descartes on the other, have been the subjects of discussion and
controversy in the modern age. Moreover, it has been pointed out before
that Christian Scholastic thinkers and the Renaissance philosophers engaged
in experimentation and paid attention to the world of nature a long time
before Bacon.
Roger Bacon, whom Renan calls “the real prince of thought during the
middle ages” did not limit himself to carrying out chemical experiments but
widened the scope of his experiments to include the world of nature.
Now if it can be shown that he had contact with the works of Islamic
scientists, we can conclude that his experimental approach, or rather the
origin of experimentation during the Renaissance, were both products of
Islamic thought and Muslim thinkers, because they were the ones who used
observatories and laboratories in order to discover scientific truths.
As for the Cartesian doubt, there is evidence that it had some
precedence during the Christian Middle Ages and we believe that any study
of the origin of Cartesian doubt will remain defective without any attempt
to discover it in Islamic philosophy.
Who can say that the doubt of Descartes is not wholly or partially
influenced by the doubt of Al-Ghazzali? Even if we set aside the question
of influence, the two philosophers are still found to think in parallel and
similar terms. Elsewhere in our discussions we have shown that Descartes'
“cogito” is not entirely inspired by St. Augustine and that there is much
similarity between it and Ibn Sina's idea of “man suspended in spaced.”16
In short, since Christian and Jewish Scholasticism-which is closely
related to the Islamic world-is the link connecting Islamic philosophy to
modern philosophical speculation, the probability of transfer and exchange
of ideas cannot be denied.
Indeed it would amount to hasty generalization if, without having first
properly investigated and studied the issue, we were to say that there have
been no connections between the East and the West in regard to the world of
thought and philosophic and rational speculation.
It has been proven today that an exchange dating back to the ancient
times did exist and it was renewed during the middle ages. What is there
then to stop such a connection from existing today? Ideas and opinions
cannot be imprisoned in limited geographical boundaries, their movement
cannot be restricted. What was once referred to as the secret of the atom,
is common scientific knowledge today in all parts of the world.
We cannot find any example of a full and complete study of Islamic
philosophy either in the East or in the West before the middle of the
nineteenth century. This is so because whenever the Western scholar turned
his attention to the study of matters relating to the East, it was mostly
with the economic or political aspects that he was concerned, not with the
cultural aspect.
If we encounter any instances of such cultural studies in the
eighteenth century or the early part of the nineteenth century, it is mostly
based on Latin sources. As for the Easterners, they were so lost in
economic and political difficulties during this period that they had no
interest in keeping alive their ancient culture or revitalizing their
Islamic heritage.
In the second half of the nineteenth century the European Orientalists
became interested m Islamic subjects and became vanguards of a movement
that rapidly developed and reached its zenith during the first quarter of
the twentieth century. Some of these European scholars even travailed to
the East and studied in its schools in order to better understand the
spiritual and intellectual life of the Orient.
Europe and America competed with each other in the publication of
Islamic culture. Schools where Oriental languages were taught, and colleges
where Islamic subjects were studied were established in Paris, Rome,
London, and Berlin. Scholarly and historical societies were formed for the
sole purpose of investigating and examining the various aspects of Islamic
civilization.
Periodically, seminars were held by Orientalists, where valuable
presentations and discussions occured. At the same time, learned and
scholarly journals and publications were devoted to the study of Oriental
subjects. These debates, discussions and exchanges of views, caused the
cloud of ignorance and confusion to be scattered and the facts of the
matter to be more clearly perceived.
This Orientalist movement had welcome results. Texts unknown up to the
time were discovered. Precious manuscripts of texts were published. The new
techniques of publication of books accompanied with notes and indices came
into widespread usage, and a number of the most important works in the
libraries of the Muslim world were translated into living European
languages such as Italian, French, English and German.
The publishing of such translated works in turn stimulated interest and
discussion in various aspects of Islamic civilization such as politics,
economics, history, literature, Quranic interpretation and exegesis,
science and philosophy all of which received brief treatment in articles
published in scholarly journals and were dealt with extensively in books.
Research and study increased in proportion to the level of knowledge
and information that became available. Scholars and investigators fell into
the habit of spending years in scholarly research in order to clarify
hidden or poorly understood points. Such intensive researches led various
groups of scholars to specialize in different aspects of the Islamic
civilization.
Some became experts in the Arabic language and Islamic literature while
others became specialists in Islamic theology and jurisprudence. Still a
third group concentrated on Muslim mysticism, while a fourth group delved
deep into the field of Islamic science and philosophy. The fruit of this
expansion and specialization in the field of Islamic studies was the
Encyclopedia of Islam which was published in French, German and English
languages.
This book is itself the clear proof of the extensive knowledge of Islam
gathered by the Orientalists and their intense interest in Islamic culture
and civilization. The Encyclopedia of Islam is indeed a rich and important
source of information indispensable for every researcher of Islamic
subjects.
The East was also influenced by the work of the Western Orientalists.
The scholars of the East adopted many of their views, translated many of
their texts, and following the path paved by them, became their partners in
reviving the glory and brilliance of Eastern culture.
They also finished what had been left incomplete by the Western
Orientalists or filled in gaps left in their treatment of various subjects.
These contributions, although small in each instance, were spread over a
wide range, so that none of the aspects of Islamic culture were ignored.
Still what has been done is only the beginning of an effort that must grow
and expand.
Philosophy was not left out of the general trend described above. Texts
written by Muslim philosophers, which had remained in their original
manuscript form, were published and the original Arabic versions were
compared with the Hebrew and Latin translations of them which were extant.
The study of their notes and commentaries helped a great deal in solving
any problems which may have existed in regard to their meaning.
Without the efforts of the Orientalists, these books would have
remained in some corner of a library, unread, gathering dust. And if it
were not for the fact that they understood a number of ancient and modern
languages and possessed a correct methodology, the works published by them
would not have been characterized by such care and authenticity.
The work of the European Orientalists was not limited to the printing
and publication of books; they tried to discover and explore the whole
horizon of intellectual life in Islam and to write about it. For instance,
they wrote about the history of Islamic philosophy and philosophers,
theology and the theologians, Sufism and the Sufies and described the
various sects and schools of thought found in Islam.
Sometimes they investigated the life, opinions and views of one
individual. At other times they wrote books about scientific terms and
definitions, so that their names were inseparably linked with the subject
of their specialization.
Who, for example, on hearing the name of Nicholson is not reminded of tasawwuf?
It would be outside of the scope of this work to mention all the
Orientalists alongside the subjects of their specialization which made them
famous. It would suffice to say that Orientalism possessed a unique vigour
and vitality during the first quarter of the present century which also
included the study and investigation of speculative subjects.
In spite of all this, the history of Islamic philosophy and the views
of its most eminent thinkers are as yet insufficiently understood and it is
the missing link in the chain of human intellectual history. We still do
not know exactly how this philosophy came into existence, what was the
manner of its development, what factors caused its flourishing and
flowering, and what were the causes of its decay.
Nor has the work of the Islamic philosophers ever been scrutinized one
by one so as to show how much each one of them borrowed or inherited from
his predecessors and how much of his philosophy was the result of his own
original thought. The sad truth of the matter is that the shining stars of
Islamic philosophy are strangers in their own lands and to their own
people.
What better proof of this than the fact that many of us Easterners know
more about Rousseau and Spencer than about Al-Kindi and Al-Farabi? And if
God had not so decreed that a group of Orientalists should make a study of
them, today we would have known nothing useful about these great figures.
The work of the Orientalists, however, is too limited in scope to
adequately deal with a subject such as Islamic philosophy. Moreover, in
some cases they contain either literal or technical errors, or are
deficient in some other manner. Sometimes these studies are so brief that
it is not possible to fathom the intent of their writers.
Perhaps the cause of all these difficulties is that some of the
scholars who have investigated Islamic philosophy do not understand the
Arabic language sufficiently and have not mastered the history of Islamic
culture. Others, not lacking in any of the aforementioned aspects are completely
ignorant of the history of Islamic philosophy.
There are, of course, brilliant exceptions to this general weakness.
Two examples of such beautiful and informative works are Van den Bergh's
translation of the Metaphysics of Ibn Rushd, and De Boer's History of
Islamic Philosophy. One cannot reall Van den Bergh's book and not feel that
he is reading a philosopher commenting on philosophy. And one cannot reall
De Boer's book without wishing that he had made it a much larger work.17
Of course, much time has passed since the publication of the books
mentioned above and the other works by the Orientalists. They are thus in
need of revision, and the conclusions reached in them must be reexamined
in the light of the far greater knowledge of Islamic thought now available.
This is especially true since the more access we have attained to the
original manuscripts, the greater was the rapidity by which our problems
have been solved and our mistakes corrected.
Although the history of the efforts to gather the inheritance of
Islamic tradition and attempts to revitalize the Islamic civilization date
back only to the beginning of the twentieth century, a great deal of
progress has been made and much material has been made available to the
researcher. Nevertheless, the need for new analysis and discussion based on
the study of these newly available facts and source material is absolutely
undeniable.
We must continue on the path that we have been following until now and
fully discover this hidden link in the chain of human intellectual history,
and put it in its proper place. Up to now, the Orientalists have made
important contributions and have made great efforts to accomplish this
task.
It is our duty to try to overtake them; and if we are unable to do
this, at least we should keep pace with them. It is not enough for us to
make a thinker or an inventor famous by mentioning his ideas or his
inventions, we must make an effort to revive his works. All the nations of
the world are in a race with one another in trying to publish the works of
their scientists and thinkers.
The field of our study is vast and there are innumerable opportunities
for research. Our first duty is to gather and publish the writings of the
philosophers of Islam; works which have remained as manuscripts until this
day, or have been published in an unsatisfactory form. I say this because
as long as we have not studied the works of our philosophers and scientists
in the language in which they were originally written, we cannot understand
the essence and the core of their teachings.
When we found out that treatises written by Al-Kindi are to be found
in the libraries of the city of Istanbul, or that manuscripts of the works
of Al-Farabi are scattered among libraries of London, Paris, and Escorial,18 or that from the famous work of Ibn Sina, Shifa',
the publisher has printed only the first volume, Logic,19 then we realized the importance and necessity of
gathering the texts of our philosophers and publishing them.
It is unnecessary to mention the fact that Ibn Rushd is better known in
the Latin world than he is in the Muslim world, and that some American
Orientalists have been publishing his writings for some time now.
The publishing of these texts would take a long time. Therefore it is
necessary that a number of individuals and academies cooperate with one
another in accomplishing this important task. The Cairo University had at
one time adopted an interesting and effective technique in that it gathered
films of some of the manuscripts and printed some samples from them.
Unfortunately it has recently stopped doing this. Maybe it has been
because of the war, and the university will resume this practice. I also
hope that the College of Alexandria will also join this effort, and finally
that all the universities of the East shall compete with one another in
accomplishing this task.
A comment about the libraries of Istanbul must be made here. In these
libraries, the heritage of more than six centuries of Islamic culture is
stored. Naturally, texts can be found there the copies of which do not
exist anywhere else in the world.
For example, a German Orientalist has recently found some precious
volumes in these libraries among which Ash'ari's Maqalat al-Islamiyin
can be mentioned. This book is an important source in the field of the
history of Islamic doctrines. Since the publication of Ash'ari's book and
the Nihayat al-Aqdam of Shahristani, some of the views we had held
regarding Islamic theology (kalam) and theologians (mutakallimun)
have changed.
I have no doubt that our Turkish brothers are aware of the value of
this priceless heritage, and if they themselves are unable to publish these
masterpieces they shall not hesitate to make them available to those who
wish to do so.
Besides the publishing of these texts, we should also engage in
investigation and discussion of the works of Islamic philosophers and get
to know them just as well as we do the non-Islamic philosophers. We should
prepare biographies of our thinkers, describe their views in detail,
explain the factors which were instrumental in formation of their views,
clearly evaluate their intellectual debt to the ancients and to their
immediate predecessors, and examine the similarities existing between their
ideas and those of their contemporaries.
I hope that the day will come when they will write about Al-Farabi just
as they are writing today about Musa ibn Maymun, that they become as
familiar with the works of Ibn Sina as they are with the writings of Thomas
Aquinas, and shall discuss AlGhazzali just as they discuss Descartes. That
would be the day when it can be justifiably said that Islamic philosophy
has been given the recognition and stature it so rightly deserves.
- 1. See
V. Cousin, Cours de l' histoire de la philosophie, pp.4849, Paris
l841.
- 2. E.
Renan, Histoire Generale de systeme comparedes langues semitiques;
- 3. L.
Gauthier, L'esprit semitique et l'esprit aryen, pp. 66~67, Paris 1923,
see also I. Madkour, La Place d' al-Farabi, p, 14, Paris, 1934.
- 4.
Renan, “Le 'islamisme et la Science”, dans Discours et Confe'rences,
p. 337 Paris, 1887; Madkour, La Place d' al-Farabi, p. 54.
- 5.
Renan, Averroe's et l'Averroesme, pp. 79, II, Paris, eighth edition
- 6. Ibid,
vol. I, p. 171. See also Goldziher, Le dogme et la loi de 1' Islam,
pp. 29-34.
- 7.
Renan, Averroe's, Avertissement, p.11.
- 8. Ibid,
p.89.
- 9. Ibid.
- 10. G.
Dugat, Histoire des philsophes et des theologians musulmans, p. XV,
- 11. G.
Tennemann, Manuel de l' histoire de la philosophic (French translation
by V. Cousin), T. I, pp.358359, Paris 1839.
- 12.
Madkour, La place d'al-Farabi, p.46 et suive.
- 13.
Madkour, L'Organon d'Aristote, p. 49 et suive, Paris, 1934.
- 14. L.
Gauthier, “Scolastique musulmane et sehoiastique chretienne”, dans
Revue d'Histoire de la philosophie, Paris, 1928.
- 15.
Renan, Averroe's, p. 88; Duhem, Le systeme du monde T. IV p 321 et
suive, Paris, 1917.
- 16. S.
Van den Bergh, Die Epitome der Metaphysik des Averroes, Leiden, 1924.
- 17. T.J.
De Boer, Geschichte der Philosophie im Islam, Stuttgart, 1901, tr.
ang., par E.R, Jones, The History of Philosophy in Islam, London, 1903
- 18.
Madkour, La place, pp.223-225.
- 19.
Madkour, L' Organon, pp. 1920.
|
